ABSTRACT The normative landscape of academic research is increasingly fragmented. Classical CUDOS norms and counternorms coexist across profession, market, corporation, state and community logics, yet existing scholarship rarely explains how these norms are patterned, how they interact, or how tensions between them are mediated. This conceptual article develops an institutional logics wheel of research norms: a relational, spatial heuristic grounded in institutional logics and higher education governance scholarship. Using a structured theory‐synthesis of relevant literature, we map CUDOS and DECAY, an inverted model of classical norms, onto the wheel, derive propositions about compatibility, conflict, hybridisation and bridging, and identify hybrid logics (entrepreneurial, open science, responsible innovation, translational research) and bridging mechanisms (excellence, innovation, impact, sustainable development). The analysis shows how particular configurations can intensify metric‐driven behaviour and research‐integrity risks, while others create constructive alignments between scholarly rigour and societal relevance. We argue that the wheel offers a diagnostic and design tool for governing research norms and a basis for comparative empirical testing.
Cai et al. (2026) studied this question.